SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Huawei Arrest Tests China's Leaders as Fear and Anger Grip Elite
The arrest of one of China's leading tech executives by the Canadian police for extradition to the United States has unleashed a combustible torrent of outrage and alarm among affluent and influential Chinese, posing a delicate political test for President Xi Jinping and his grip on the loyalty of the nation's elite.
The outpouring of conflicting sentiments — some Chinese have demanded a boycott of American products while others have expressed anxiety about their investments in the United States — underscores the unusual, politically charged nature of the Trump administration's latest move to counter China's drive for technological superiority.
In a hearing on Friday in Vancouver, Canadian prosecutors said the executive, Meng Wanzhou of the Chinese telecom giant Huawei, faced accusations of participating in a scheme to trick financial institutions into making transactions that violated United States sanctions against Iran.
Unlike a new round of tariffs or more tough rhetoric from American officials, the detention of Ms. Meng, the company's chief financial officer, appears to have driven home the intensifying rivalry between the United States and China in a visceral way for the Chinese establishment — and may force Mr. Xi to adopt a tougher stance against Washington, analysts said. In part, that is because Ms. Meng, 46, is so embedded in that establishment herself.
Previously: Canada Arrests Huawei's Global Chief Financial Officer in Vancouver
Related: New Law Bans U.S. Government from Buying Equipment from Chinese Telecom Giants ZTE and Huawei
Australia Bans China's Huawei (and maybe ZTE) from 5G Mobile Network Project
Washington Asks Allies to Drop Huawei
(Score: 2) by Blymie on Sunday December 09 2018, @12:00PM
The US is far from the only nation to have laws that effect non-citizens outside their borders.
However, my stated point was that the *arrest* was not 'dumb'. The OP was, as I mentioned, saying that the power and money and connections of the arrested, made the choice to arrest "dumb".
You are countering with an argument on whether or not the laws in question are wrong and inappropriate. Well, that's not really what I was even discussing, and yet you're linking my statements about the *arrest*.
However, to respond? I think you're wrong.
Why?
Well I don't know about your country, but my country (Canada) monitors, tracks, and gathers evidence on international spies -- even when not in Canada. And if as case is built (eg, spying against Canada), then they can be arrested in say.. the UK, or German or what not, and extradited to Canada for trial.
But that's wrong too, I suppose? I don't think that is.
What if a country has a law, stating that genocide is wrong? Crimes against humanity is wrong? Where ever committed?
Or are you suggesting that a dictator should never pay for his crimes, as long as he stays in his own country?
It isn't the concept that's wrong.
Now I think the US overreaches too. But that doesn't make the concept wrong.
Nor does it mean that my statements about an arrest, performed via a bilateral treaty, are wrong.